1. How do we think, feel, and behave towards children
How do we think, feel, and behave towards children? Developing the Child Attitude Components Scale (CACS)
Lukas J. Wolf1; Vlad Costin2,3; Colin Foad2, Geoff Haddock2, Gregory R. Maio1
1University of Bath, 2Cardiff University, 3University of Sussex
Introduction
Positivity
Stress
Model fit
CFI > .975, RMSEA < .065
(2-factor model > 1-factor model, p<.001)
Internal consistency
α > .92
α > .81
Test-retest (8.5 months)
r =
r =
Correlations among CACS factors
-.56 (babies), -.31 (toddlers), -.71 (children)
Correlations among CACS-scales
Research on parenting suggests that positive and negative views of children are not mutually exclusive (e.g., Eibach & Moch, 2011), hinting at two separate dimensions underlying people‘s attitudes towards children.
However, existing measures do not capture this
ambivalence in our attitudes towards children;
instead they assess the researchers‘ assumptions
of what constitutes liking children.
Moreover, previous measures have not considered
distinct child age groups (e.g., babies, toddlers).
The present research developed the Child Attitude Components Scales (CACS) by:
Identifying key child groups that adults spontaneously distinguish
Identifying feelings, beliefs, and behaviours that adults spontaneously use to describe these child groups (tripartite model of attitudes; Maio et al., 2018)
Broader aims:
Provide a better, more comprehensive understanding of adults‘ attitudes towards children
Identify risk and beneficial factors in adult treatment of children
Table 1. Properties of the CACS-scales.
Construct Validity
Four studies (N=1,656) tested the scales’ convergent and discriminant validity.
Positivity dimension
Positivity on all three scales predicted…
more positive perceptions and evaluations of babies, toddlers, and children (but not adults)
more motivation to be a parent, higher need for affect, higher generativity
Positivity on the CACS-children predicted…
contributing more to a charity event benefitting children (see below)
evaluating child-related stimuli (videos, stories, images) more positively
higher self-transcendence (e.g., helpfulness) & conservation values (e.g., security)
 All scales unrelated to need for cognition, need for structure, stress-related outcomes
Stress dimension
Stress on the CACS-toddlers predicted…
more anxiety about interacting with toddlers
more support for corporal punishment of toddlers (see top right corner)
a higher need for structure
All scales unrelated to need for cognition and to positivity-related outcomes
Figure 2. The stress factor on the CACS-toddlers predicts more support for corporal punishment of toddlers. The positivity factor is unrelated to this outcome.
Conclusions
Together, this research shows that the CACS is a reliable and valid measure of adults’ attitudes towards child groups.
Advantages of the CACS
The content of the CACS was derived from people’s spontaneous characterisations of children, thus providing a new level of understanding of how adults evaluate children
In contrast to previous measures, the CACS also captures stress-related attitudes
The CACS can be applied to match specific contexts (e.g., using CACS-toddlers to test corporal punishment attitudes towards toddlers)
Practical uses of the CACS
The CACS can be an important tool to explain adult-child interactions (e.g., within family, institutions, or society)
The CACS can help identify risk (e.g., corporal punishment, abuse) and beneficial factors (e.g., donating to a child-related event) in adult treatment of child groups.
Item Generation
We conducted five studies (N=1609) to identify key child groups & items for the CACS scales.
Child age groups
We first identified which child groups adults spontaneously distinguish, using open-ended questions. The most common child age groups were babies (0-1.5 years), toddlers ( years), and children (4-11 years).
Scale content
To generate items for the scale, participants described their beliefs, feelings, and behaviours concerning babies, toddlers, and children in open-ended questions. Subsequently, participants rated how much they agreed with the resulting statements about child groups.
Factor structure
Two factors emerged consistently across all child groups, with one factor capturing positivity toward them and one capturing stress elicited by them.
We used CTT and IRT to select the best performing items.
This resulted in the scales: CACS-babies, CACS-toddlers, and CACS-children
Positivity factor λ
Stress factor
Babies make me feel affectionate
0.91
Babies make me feel anxious
0.84
Babies make me feel love
0.86
Babies make me feel frustrated
0.73
I am enthusiastic towards babies
I am exhausted by babies
0.71
I feel distant towards babies (R)
-0.85
Babies make me feel stressed
0.88
Babies don’t make me feel awe (R)
-0.65
Babies don’t make me feel anxious (R)
-0.69
Table 2. CACS-babies items.
Figure 1. The positivity factor on the CACS-children predicts donating more to a charity benefitting children (BBC Children in Need). The stress factor is unrelated to this outcome.
References
Contact
Eibach, R. P., & Mock, S. E. (2011). Idealizing parenthood to rationalize parental investments. Psychological Science, 22,
Maio, G. R., Haddock, G., & Verplanken, B. (2018). The psychology of attitudes and attitude change. Sage Publications Limited.
Dr Lukas J. Wolf
University of Bath
Website: researchgate.net/profile/Lukas_Wolf3
Website: researchportal.bath.ac.uk/en/persons/lukas-wolf
@child_salience